The Portland daily press., 1887-04-02
CAUSED BY BROKEN HANGERS.
Testimony as to the RosIIndaIe AccI-
dent by Prof. Swain Before the
Railroad Commissioners.

Boston, April 1.-The Railroad Commits
sioners this morning resumed the inyestiga-
tion into the causes of the accident at Ros-
lindale. Engineer White of the wrecked
train was recalled and testified that he had
100 pounds of steam when he left Roslindale
he was making steam when he went over the
bridge, but only very little; be was certain
he was not going over IL or 10 miles an hour
he did not apply the brakes at all after leav-
ing Roslindale and was certain of it; the last
time he applied the brakes was at Roslindale
and he did not apply them even when he felt
the jar; he felt the shock previously testified
to- just as the forward wheels of the engine
struck the abutment; this made him look
around, and just as the first car struck the
abutment 1t was detached from the tender
he saw the rear trucks of the first car fly out
from under the car to the westward as they
reached the abutment; the forward trucks
were then running on the ground; when he
looked again the second car was sliding along
the rails with its trucks out-that was, he
could n0tlsee any trucks.
Fireman Billings was recalled and said he
was confident that the train was not going
over IL miles an hour it was not going quite
as fast as usual because there was not so
much steam as usual.
Prof. Geo. f. Swain of the Institute of
Technology, civil engineer, testified that he
had made a special study of bridges and
bridge manufacture in this country and
abroad he had never examined the bridge
before the accident but had made a careful
examination of the wreck; he was of the
opinion that that the accident was due to the
failure of the hangers in the joint block of
the west truss; the cause of the breakage of
the hangers was the eccentricity of the loops
and the poor condition Of the iron; he esti-
mated that the hangers that he found un-
broken would not carry over $4,000 pounds
apiece In their. present condition; the strain
been about 10000 pounds; he should
not have regarded the hangers as
safe to carry the load, even if in good condi-
tion; the post under the joint where the
hangers were, carried part of the strain and
thus relieved the hangers; even when the
bridge was new. an expert engineer would
not pass 1t as safe If he properly estimated
the lack of strength by the eccentricity of
the hangers; in this bridge the eccentricity
of the hangers could have been avoided with
out trouble by placing the floor beams differ
emily: he considered the workmanship of
the hangers to be very poor and the welding
particularly bad; the iron was not of good
quality, but the area of the hangers was suffi-
eiently large to have supported the weight
required if they had not been eccentric Wit
ness here examined the hangers and describ-
ed the different breaks, confirming the testi-
m0ny of previous witnesses as to the greater
part being old breaks; he thought these
breaks had been going on gradually for
years. there was no doubt in his mind but
what the broken hangers were the original
cause OF the accident Asked by Mr.. Crock
er to account for the getting of three cars on
to the embankment after the hangers had
broken, witness said that the I-beam, or post
under the hangers, together with the floor
system would yield gradually and.supp0rt
the weight of the train for some seconds the
I-beam would hold, alone about 80, 900 pounds
In regard to iron bridges vs. stone arched
bridges witness said that the latter were the
strongest when well.built and easiest to keep
in repair. Not that iron bridges could not be
built perfectly strong and safe, but there
was no reliable data at present to estimate
the life of an iron bridge. 1t was merely
question of cost.
Professor Swain continued his testimony
at the afternoon session, and, in answer to
questions by Chairman Crocker, said he
never saw bridge where the floor system
was hung from the top cord he thought
there was special danger in this form of
bridge in case of derailment, where the cars
were very likely to strike and throw down
the top cord of the truss.
To Mr.. Patnam, witness said he had ex-
amined the general work in the bridge out
side the hangers and found it to be of good
workmanship as far as he could Judge, and
feet in the bridge was the improper design
of the hangers, and, as far Os he could see,
that was the sole cause of the accident; he
estimated that the hangers, if straight,
would, II properly made, support 100000
pounds with their present area, whereas,
with the eccentricity as actually made, they
would support only 10000 pounds, or about
one-eighth of the weight they ought to have
supported. To Mr.. Croker, witness said it
strong as a straight one; it was only ques-
tion of care and cost as far as he could see,
this bridge was safely braced. To Mr.. Will
liams. witness said that the bridge was car
rying with every locomotive that went over
it nearly the maximum weight it could bear
without breaking.
Mr.. Edward Hewins, builder of the bridge
then made a statement, in which he defend
ed the use of welded loops in hangers.